Flight over Lake Michigan?

I still have a crappy xerox copy of the C205 manual (I owned N8411Z). The two hundred or so accounts of ditchings compiled by Doug Ritter are CLEARLY after the 205 was certified (Ritter was born in the late 40s). And recall, in that day the manual was little more than a phamphlet.

There is a little snip in the P2V manual, which I no longer have, as to ditching in with the gear UP and the propellors feathered (turbines running) if the crew has time for that.

What it really boils down to, I think, is LITTLE data, we don't do certification ditching run so there's really nothing behind that little paragraph in the booklet.

Still, I'd take the beach or trees rather than Lake Michigan. The Kodiak dunk tank taught me that.
 
bbchien said:
I still have a crappy xerox copy of the C205 manual (I owned N8411Z). The two hundred or so accounts of ditchings compiled by Doug Ritter are CLEARLY after the 205 was certified (Ritter was born in the late 40s). And recall, in that day the manual was little more than a phamphlet.

There is a little snip in the P2V manual, which I no longer have, as to ditching in with the gear UP and the propellors feathered (turbines running) if the crew has time for that.

What it really boils down to, I think, is LITTLE data, we don't do certification ditching run so there's really nothing behind that little paragraph in the booklet.

Still, I'd take the beach or trees rather than Lake Michigan. The Kodiak dunk tank taught me that.
Click to expand...

Yes -- the 205 manual is tiny. There's plenty of good data, though some must be interpolated (I'm sure the FAA used these tables for performance and W&B problems!)

This clip seems to evidence forward-flip on impact.

The older Bonanza POH recommended gear up ditching.
 
bbchien said:
I still have a crappy xerox copy of the C205 manual (I owned N8411Z). The two hundred or so accounts of ditchings compiled by Doug Ritter are CLEARLY after the 205 was certified (Ritter was born in the late 40s). And recall, in that day the manual was little more than a phamphlet.

There is a little snip in the P2V manual, which I no longer have, as to ditching in with the gear UP and the propellors feathered (turbines running) if the crew has time for that.

What it really boils down to, I think, is LITTLE data, we don't do certification ditching run so there's really nothing behind that little paragraph in the booklet.

Still, I'd take the beach or trees rather than Lake Michigan. The Kodiak dunk tank taught me that.
Click to expand...

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.soaring/browse_thread/thread/db6d5dd1f8979e01/9ffef1e3bb9042d4?lnk=gst&q=water+landing#9ffef1e3bb9042d4


In the July, 2008 edition of "Gliding International", edited by John
Roake, there's this word on water landings:
Walter Schneider and Wolf Lemke of LS fame carried out water landing
test and ditched an LS1 prior to the World Championships in Finland.
They were worried about the lack of land out options and the
proliferation of lakes. They assumed that landing wheel up would be
the preferred option, but discovered that the glider 'bounced' off the
surface and dropped a wing as the fuselage entered the water because
of its shape. They tried it again with the wheel down, deliberately
put the tail down first and discovered that the wheel acted as a
gentle brake and controlled the whole process much better."
Click to expand...

But then, most gliders have shorter legs...
 
I've flown 'around' the bottom of Lake Michigan about a half dozen times, and I've noticed that the leg eastward is creeping a little farther from the shores of Gary, IN each time. In part I think because my confidence is growing, and in part because Gary is buttugly and to be avoided (IMHO). The problem is Class B goes so far out into the lake that I'm at the edge of my calculated glide distance, so the visual proximity is probably illusionary.

I would fly across the lake, if by myself, but it never seems that those Michigan trips are the ones I am going solo.
 
Pjsmith said:
I've flown 'around' the bottom of Lake Michigan about a half dozen times, and I've noticed that the leg eastward is creeping a little farther from the shores of Gary, IN each time. In part I think because my confidence is growing, and in part because Gary is buttugly and to be avoided (IMHO). The problem is Class B goes so far out into the lake that I'm at the edge of my calculated glide distance, so the visual proximity is probably illusionary.

I would fly across the lake, if by myself, but it never seems that those Michigan trips are the ones I am going solo.
Click to expand...
The Class B proposal will take it an additional 5NM out into the lake. See [thread]20073[/thread]
 
Not sure if I'd do it if I were PIC, but I guess I wittingly used up a coupla lives on this trip to and from KOSH. :D

Here's a look at our return to our first stop; PA-32, IFR, 5000 (yeah, I know). Note that we were flying VOR-to-VOR until reaching Lake Erie, where we went RNAV...with a non-IR student pilot at the helm, so it;s a bit wiggly.

We had a decent tailwind coming home, so crossing the lakes didn't take long. On the way out, we had less than 10 kts headwind at 6000.
The PIC, a CFII who once ferried a 210 from Australia to NJ, shrugged at my concern (and grinned at my little PFD): "In this thing, fully loaded, if the engine quits, you could look straight down and still not see the spot you're going to land on..." I guess his point was that if you're going over the water at all under such circumstances, it makes little difference how far from shore you are (except, of course, for time before rescue).

Anyway, I wasn't too worried- the engine in this plane is very fresh, we were on radar and in touch with ATC the whole time, and we were squawk-free for the entire journey... I even fell asleep over Lake Erie on the return trip!
 

Attachments

  • rotosh08-course03.jpg
    rotosh08-course03.jpg
    81.8 KB · Views: 18
your CFI must have missed the day of ground school about gliding. weight has absolutely no bearing on the glide ratio of any aircraft, only the best glide speed.

and out of our rental fleet, the engine with 3400 hours on it since TBO is the one i trust the most. YMMV.
 
tonycondon said:
your CFI must have missed the day of ground school about gliding. weight has absolutely no bearing on the glide ratio of any aircraft, only the best glide speed.
Click to expand...
I thought Best Glide decreases with weight in a given aircraft in the same fashion as Va?
 
it does kenny. best glide speed and weight are directly correlated. the best glide ratio however is a constant.

thats why competition glider pilots fill their wings up with water. they can go faster on course that way.
 
KennyFlys said:
I thought Best Glide decreases with weight in a given aircraft in the same fashion as Va?
Click to expand...

The sink rate changes (feet per minute), the speed to fly to get the best angle increases with increasing weight but the angle remains approximatly constant.
 
tonycondon said:
it does kenny. best glide speed and weight are directly correlated. the best glide ratio however is a constant.

thats why competition glider pilots fill their wings up with water. they can go faster on course that way.
Click to expand...
Ahhh... ok. You did say "ratio" and I didn't catch that. :redface:
 
gprellwitz said:
As Tony alluded to, that right there would worry me. Ever hear of "Maintenance Induced Failures?":hairraise:
Click to expand...

Sure. I've prevented more than one with good preflighting.
But "fresh" is not a technical term, despite the implied "recent overhaul". It just seemed to be running well. I'm more inclined to worry about an engine that is close to (or past) TBO, but-knock wood- I haven't dealt with an engine failure yet, so what do I know? :D
 
sean,

i havent had to deal with an engine failure yet. but that 3400 SMOH O-320 is the strongest engine of our fleet.
 
tonycondon said:
it does kenny. best glide speed and weight are directly correlated. the best glide ratio however is a constant.

thats why competition glider pilots fill their wings up with water. they can go faster on course that way.
Click to expand...

This is true- I knew this, but forgot. I may have "mis-paraphrased" there, forgetting that weight affects many things, but not glide ratio- he was referring to the (constant) glide ratio... and of course exaggerating somewhat. :D

Suffice it to say a PA-32 is not a very good glider. The one landing I got to fly, I was advised to carry more power than I'm used to.
Never asked the PIC, and I can't find a straight answer online about the ratio for the (fixed gear) Cherokee Six... anybody know?
 
On the way out, we had filed to fly V228 over the Southwestern portion of the Lake Michigan, but Chicago rerouted us on the 100nm "loop" around ORD. This put us right smack dab in the middle of the worst of the weather and it began to get quite turbulent. A couple of pilots up ahead of me started relaying to the controllers about increased convective activity and they were rerouted further south. I was turned North, descended to 3000 (out of 8000) and vectored out over the lake. I was kept within 8 miles of shore but still, at 3000 feet, I wouldn't have made it to shore if the big fan in the front quit spinning. We stayed "wet" for about 40 miles north bound and finally cleared direct 10C which is where we requested direct to 100 nm previous.

On the way out of OSH, we departed Rwy 09 and climbed straight out to intercept V510 climbing to 9500 and over the lake. Smooth ride home and the view was beautiful. The only thing that scared the bejeezus out of us was at 9200 we heard a loud POP in the back of the plane and I thought the cargo door had open or something. Then, of course, I started hearing the engine miss and vibrations, and the control column felt loose (all in my mind). After we landed 3.5 hours later, I discovered the loud pop was a sealed bowl of cereal that had popped open under pressure. I knew this because I had fruit loops from the rear of my Cherokee up to just behind the front seats!

The trip across the lake went very smooth and next year I'll probably do the same.

Be Particular,
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top